Indeed, numerous experiments in the so called HNLC (high nutrient, low chlorophyll) areas of the Pacifric show that adding Fe (iron) creates massive algae blooms. I have repeatedly suggested this as a source for fuel algae.

It's a pity that some of the ocean iron fertilization efforts are not taking off as planned, but I do appreciate why the environmentalists are concerned...it is better to go a bit slow on this...we don't want to wage war with the mighty oceans!

cacofonix wrote:It's a pity that some of the ocean iron fertilization efforts are not taking off as planned, but I do appreciate why the environmentalists are concerned...it is better to go a bit slow on this...we don't want to wage war with the mighty oceans!

I agree, to a point. Most of the iron fertilization plans to date have been carbon sequestration schemes. They plan to add the iron, cause a bloom that would die and sink, taking the carbon with it. The problem with that is that it might result in dead zones not unlike the ones that already happen off the Gulf coast of the USA.

I, on the other hand, want folks to fertilize and harvest the plankton (a.k.a. algae) and not let it die and sink. This is a carbon recycling scheme, not a sequestration scheme. Only the human haters amoungst the greens can be against that, right?

@ Jahansen - You have a point, but just that we might want to be a bit careful when we deal with vast, complex systems such as the oceans...it is better to take our time to learn about them rather than make too many assumptions...any negative effects could prove disastrous while dealing with such systems

cacofonix wrote: we might want to be a bit careful when we deal with vast, complex systems such as the oceans...

I agree, but there are already vast areas of the oceans where our activity creates algae blooms that result in adverse change (dead zones). Perhaps the algae should be harvested rather than be permitted to die, sink, and become the sourse of hypoxia.